, 1887-05-05

against tne DOMINION WltnOut Iurtncr
discussion. Under article fifth il
is assumed that seizures and deten-
tions which have taken place during
the past season in consequence of non.
compliance by United States fisher
men with the custom laws of Canada
have in all cases involved a violation
of the treaty Of 1918 by the Canadian
authorities, and the. Canadian govern
ment was in effect asked before going
into court to plead guilty to
all the counts contained in
this part of the indictment
against the United States, then Mr..
Bayard's proposal amounts to this
That the government of the dominion
is to submit its conduct in the past
and its rights in the future to arbitrate
of a commission without any assurance
whatever that the recommendation OF
that commission are likely to be ac-
ceptcd by congress, and that before in
quiring commences it is to place upon
record an admission that it has been
in the wrong upon all of the most i'm
portant points in the controversy.
Such admission would involve public
remuneration OF substantial and valu-
able rights and privileges for all time
without any sort of equivalent as COM
pensation. trust that her majesty's
government to the utmost of its ability
to discourage the United States from
pressing the proposals in their
present shape and will avoid any
action which might reduce the belief
that the offer embodied in them is one
which deserves II favorable reception
at the hands of the government Of the
dominion.
The answer to this came in the form
of telegram from Sir Henry Holland
to Lord Landsdowne under date OF
February "a, 1887, as follows: "Iour
dispatch of December 2Sth has been
carefully considered by her majesty's
government who will communicate
with the United States government in
general accordance with the views OF
your minister on Mr.. Bayard's pro-
posal for mixed commission. There
are, however, one or two points on
which further communication will be
made to you. Her majesty's govern
ment feel it right to intimate to
you, after much consideration of
the whole subject, while
endeavoring to bring about an adm
terim arrangement they are disposed
to think that the best and simplest So
luton of the present difficulties might
be found if both parties would agree
to revert to the condition of things cx-
isting under the treaty of Washington,
the fisheries being again thrown re-
ciprocally open and fish products be-
ing again reciprocally admitted duty
free. This arrangement, If not perma-
ment, to subsist at least for time so
as to admit of n discussion of more ex-
tended commercial arrangement.
They think, however, it would be
clearly to the interest of the dominion
to offer this arrangement without any
suggestion OF pecuniary indemnity.
To this Lord Lansdowne answered,
under date OF February 26th: In
reply to your telegram of the Oath OF
February, my government will not &C
cept your suggestion of reverting tenn
porarily to the condition of things exist
ing under the treaty of Washington,
and does not desire to raise the question
of indemnity"
Lord Salisbury, in communicating
with the American government the
consent of the imperial authorities to
mixed convention to report upon the
matters referred to in the then first
articles in the draft of the protocol
communicated to Earl Clarendon by
Mr.. Adams in 1866, says: pending a
termination OF the questions which it
would discuss it would be indis-
pensnble that the United States
fishing vessels entering Canadian bays
and harbors should govern themselves
not only according to the terms of the
convention of 1918, but by regulations
to which they in common with other
vessels are subject while within such
waters. Her majesty's government,
however, have no doubt that every
effort will be made to enforce these
regulations in such manner as to
cause the smallest amount Of incon-
venience to fishing vessels entering
Canadian ports under stress of weather,
or for any other legitimate purpose"
Lord Salisbury then makes the
been widely published and COM
mented on, that as evidence
of good will of both Great Britain and
Canada they are willing TO return to
the operation of the Washington
treaty for the present fishing season,
or longer, waiving all claims upon the
100000 pounds indemnity under the
Halifax award, since that seemed to
be the chief objection OF the United
States to the treaty. He then goes on
to name the scope proposed by the
mixed commission suggested by
Mr.. Adams in 1866 for defining free
fishery boundaries, settling rights OF
fishermen, etc, which were in general
terms similar to the proposal OF Secre-
tary Bayards given above
Yesterday the minister OF marine
and fisheries declined to bring
down IL copy of instructions to the